If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Originally Posted by centexfarmer

^ You're wasting your time Canuck.

He lives in a bubble.

The 85% live in a bubble. I don't see any interest at all in getting to the truth of Benghazi. No interest in a dead Ambassador, no interest in why the US military was ordered not to come to the aid of Americans in trouble.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Originally Posted by JayHawk

Hicks has a political agenda. Nothing more. All will be very clear soon, and without the assitance of the republican fucktards who wanna make this into Watergate where it is clearly not. They are just desperate for some reason they wont look like complete shitheads in the national spotlight. THIS will be another miss.

Originally Posted by Jack Springer

Hicks voted for Clinton in the primary in 2008 and voted for Obama for President twice.

the proverbial BOOM !!!

off to trader joes

thanks for the new information Jack

many here don't care for information - they prefer baseless attacks and derailing based on nada

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

new day - good day - sunny in glamourous astoria - trader joes run done - brunch with mom soon

unfortunately while it's a new day - it's the same BS from the gang that follows the narrative w/o actually reading much less investigating

we have people who trash heroes on the ground - in libya - one who died - others who were involved prior to/during/after the terror attack - he says they suck

we have others who derail threads with bush this bush that

and other who just types BENGHAZI !!!!

this constitutes critical thought it appears

well, critical thought is something else - and here's some of it for ya - happy mothers day from a mother and a smart lady

a couple of pearls but not nearly enough so see if u can spare some time to read it - think about it - perhaps chat about it

vs. what you've been doing

cheers and happy mothers day to all

this week the fog has lifted - for those interested in seeing that is -

The Benghazi story until now has been a jumble of factoids that didn't quite cohere, didn't produce a story that people could absorb and hold in their minds. This week that changed. Three State Department officials testifying under oath to a House committee changed it, by adding information that gave form to a growing picture. Gregory Hicks, Mark Thompson and Eric Nordstrom were authoritative and credible. You knew you were hearing the truth as they saw and experienced it. Not one of them seemed political. You had no sense of how they voted. They were professionals. They'd seen a bad thing. They came forward to tell the story. They put the lie to the idea that all questioning of Obama administration actions in Benghazi are partisan and low.

this admin is not very good at getting things done for the american people but they do run a good campaign - that we know

The Obama White House sees every event as a political event. Really, every event, even an attack on a consulate and the killing of an ambassador. Because of that, it could not tolerate the idea that the armed assault on the Benghazi consulate was a premeditated act of Islamist terrorism. That would carry a whole world of unhappy political implications, and demand certain actions. And the American presidential election was only eight weeks away. They wanted this problem to go away, or at least to bleed the meaning from it.

why couldn't they just tell the truth ?

Because they didn't want this attack dominating the headline with an election coming. It would open the administration to criticism of its intervention in Libya. President Obama had supported overthrowing Moammar Gadhafi and put U.S. force behind the Libyan rebels. Now Libyans were killing our diplomats. Was our policy wrong? More importantly, the administration's efforts against al Qaeda would suddenly come under scrutiny and questioning. The president, after the killing of Osama bin Laden, had taken to suggesting al Qaeda was over. Al Qaeda was done. But if an al Qaeda offshoot in Libya was killing our diplomats, the age of terrorism was not over.

This week's testimony from Messrs. Hicks, Thompson and Nordstrom was clarifying, to say the least.

Mr. Hicks, deputy chief of mission at the time of the attack, said the YouTube video was never an event in Libya, and no one in Benghazi or Tripoli saw what was happening as a spontaneous street protest. Beth Jones, the acting assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, sent an email on Sept. 12 saying: "The group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists." Mr. Hicks himself said he spoke to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at 2 a.m. Benghazi time the day after the attack and told her it was a planned attack, not a street protest.

how funny (not really) that at the beginning it was too early to talk about ...... and perhaps that's true and now it's old news per Jay Carney - who must want to quit in the worst way no ?

From the day of the attack until this week, the White House spin was too clever by half. In the weeks and months after the attack White House spokesmen said they were investigating the story, an internal review was under way. When the story blew open again, last week, they said it was too far in the past: "Benghazi happened a long time ago." Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, really said that.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Why isn't there as much effort to get the ones who did the attacks than pointing fingers at the President and former Secretary of State? I don't see anything about the attackers.

So you see why everyone knows this Benghazi "scandal" is nothing more than an exploitation of the death of an American ambassador and 3 others by republicans to discredit the Obama and Clinton. Republicans say nothing about the attackers.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

I just saw Obama say again, and again, that the same thing as said before was said again. The Attackers need to be found and tried. There is nothing but GOP talking about Oama and Clinton to discredit them, especially Clinton since she will most likely be the Presidential candidate and will win, win, win, no matter what the GOOP says. There, that was a typing error, but I'm not gonna correct it. GOOP looks good.

Besides, it must be good as GOOP is in my spell check.. There!

BEWARE! Harassing the Indian may result in sudden and severe hair loss.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Originally Posted by loki81

I'm not histrionic about Benghazi or anything, and don't think it's high on the list of major government scandals, but it does seem like the talking points were purposefully edited to downplay terrorism and instead blame the whole thing on a shitty anti-Islamic video... I'd love to know where that push came from and why.

(side note, as offensive and stupid as that video was, I can't believe that the director would have been sentenced to a year in jail for using a false alias if not for the connection drawn between that video and the Benghazi attack by the State Department)

You have intellectual honesty, a quality sorly lacking in here. It wouldn't be such a great scandal if the Administration just came out with everything and laid their cards on the table. First they wouldn't talk while it was under investigation, including a shoddy insider kiss my ass by foprmer Ambassador Thomas Pickering for Hillary Clinton. Now according to Jay Carney, the president and others "It happened a long time ago" and "It's distracting to the real business at hand for the country". The whole thing stinks...now fairly I have to say again that actions by ANY administration that might be wrongheaded should be taken seriously and investigated responsibly in as non partisan a manner as possible. You can't have moral credibiity by pounding on the opposite's sides transgressions while coddling, ignoring, or assenting to those whose policies you support. It's a serious enough scandal... it just lays bare the total lack of character of this President and his Administration as a convenient scapegoat... not a good man but still one used as a political pawn.. is essentially punished by prison while the perpetrators of the Benghazi attack haven't been touched, haven't been punished, haven't even felt the threat of having to take account for their accounts.

Years from now just how bankrupt of character Barack Obama is will be evident to just about everyone with a modicum of honesty or sense. History will likely be unkind to Bush too, but the here and now is Obama and as I've compared him before he's the Wizard of Oz of American politics. Go to him for hope, change, renewal, righting all that is wrong with the country..the world even!!!!!!!!!! But open the curtain and he's just con man Professor Marvel, getting away with his act until the curtains drew ad the charade was exposed. The curtains are drawing on the President, but too many still mesmerized by his act are loking in the oher direction and allowing him an escape to elude and fool again.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Originally Posted by rareboy

omg. how much longer lord? how much longer?

Not only that, should Ms. Clinton meet an untimely death (heaven forbid) Benghazi would be hammered by the neocons posthumously . It will be then that we will learn that she really did kill Vince Foster.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Originally Posted by MisterB

Right! It was interesting to see ABC try and gloss over this error. Seems CNN and ABC have a lot in common--screw the facts, just get the scoop first!

Now that it's becoming more clear that this BENGHAZI "scandal" was nothing more than attack on Clinton and Obama, the real media outlets will report the truth. Right now it's the right wing propaganda machine talking point.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Originally Posted by CowboyBob

Now that it's becoming more clear that this BENGHAZI "scandal" was nothing more than attack on Clinton and Obama, the real media outlets will report the truth. Right now it's the right wing propaganda machine talking point.

Precisely Bob. It seems to me that since they couldn't take Obama down during the election, the repubs decided they'll just rant and rave at everything. Kinda like throwing everything you can and hoping something sticks. It's really comical to see these folks frothing at the mouth...remember Ashley Judd? She didn't even run, yet boy did McConnell and his boys fear her potential as a challenger.

I believe that Hilary Clinton, if she wants to be, will be President in 2016. Her popularity polling numbers are off the chart compared to other potential candidates.

It was no coincidence that she did not wish to remain in the second Obama term as a cabinet secretary. By the time the next presidential cycle begins in 2015, the Benghazi truth will be known. They will try and try to smear her, but she'll be time enough for any of the repubs nonsense.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Originally Posted by CowboyBob

Now that it's becoming more clear that this BENGHAZI "scandal" was nothing more than attack on Clinton and Obama, the real media outlets will report the truth. Right now it's the right wing propaganda machine talking point.

You need to listen to Morning Joe (it's on right now), CNN, read the NYT, Washington Post. They are asking questions, trying to find out what happened that night. The release of the emails have gaps and none addressed the reason why a youtube video was blamed.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

… we have yet to hear if the Libya and Benghazi dustup was consequent of transiting weapons to Syrian rebels, to which many allusions have been made and squelched.

Originally Posted by opinterph

I honestly don’t recall hearing that. Who did the squelching?

Originally Posted by palbert

The allegation keeps surfacing at the edges. That it does so and is not dismissed openly thinks it constitutes a look under the CIA blanket. Upon thought it makes sense to arm al-Qaeda in Syria: who else is there to arm?

Originally Posted by Jack Springer

Why do you think the Administration doesn't want to talk about Benghazi? They were carrying on a gun running operation something like Col Oliver North did during the Reagan Administration.

However the media has chosen not to do much reporting on it.

I haven’t been successful in discovering much of substance about this, but invite additional commentary.

Originally Posted by palbert

(From the linked article)

It is highly plausible that Benghazi was indeed a CIA-run, arms “buy-back” program – with the further “possible” intent of forwarding those arms to Syria. As the State Department has confirmed, it allocated $40 million dollars for the purchase and “collection” of arms used during the conflict in Libya, including a “missing” stockpile of up to 20,000 MANPADS – which at least 15,000 are still unaccounted for. A report written by former US special forces operatives who served in Libya titled “Benghazi: the definitive report”, alleges that the “consulate” and weapons stockpile program was entirely run by John Brennan – Obama’s National Security Advisor at the time and now Director of the CIA – and outside the usual CIA chain of command with the sole purpose of “moving the stockpiled weapons to the another conflict – possibly Syria”.

Does anyone know the manufacturing source-country of the MANPADS referenced in the article?

Twenty-five countries, including the United States, produce man-portable air defense systems. [Wiki]

It appears that there may have been an effort to purchase these (and other such weapons) from entities in Libya – perhaps similar to a “gun buyback program” here in the US. If true, that part of the equation seems reasonable to me.

I am somewhat mystified that the report written by former US special service operatives is not available online without paying a fee. If the information it reveals is indubitably important and helpful, it seems that it should be offered to the general public freely and without constraint. There are certainly excerpts and quotes online, but why not make the whole thing available? As I understand, it is only 75 pages.

At any rate, it is perhaps important to denote the significance of the possible/alleged transfer of MANPADS to Syrian opposition forces. If true, would that represent a breach of protocol and if so, how?

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

I haven’t been successful in discovering much of substance about this, but invite additional commentary.

Does anyone know the manufacturing source-country of the MANPADS referenced in the article?

It appears that there may have been an effort to purchase these (and other such weapons) from entities in Libya – perhaps similar to a “gun buyback program” here in the US. If true, that part of the equation seems reasonable to me.

I am somewhat mystified that the report written by former US special service operatives is not available online without paying a fee. If the information it reveals is indubitably important and helpful, it seems that it should be offered to the general public freely and without constraint. There are certainly excerpts and quotes online, but why not make the whole thing available? As I understand, it is only 75 pages.

At any rate, it is perhaps important to denote the significance of the possible/alleged transfer of MANPADS to Syrian opposition forces. If true, would that represent a breach of protocol and if so, how?

Do you understand now why people are upset about not getting information about what happened at Benghazi?

The Administration will not even release how many people were hurt or tell the families of the dead how they died.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Do you understand now why people are upset about not getting information about what happened at Benghazi?

The Administration will not even release how many people were hurt or tell the families of the dead how they died.

Sounds like they are hiding something.

I understand how it is possible to characterize the incident “controversial” and why that may be useful to the President’s political adversaries. Speaking of information, do you have any additional substance to share that will help us better understand the situation posited via these elements of contention?

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

The lid on the CIA component of the Benghazi is being kept very tight.

“Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings,” the bombshell report reveals. “The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.”

Speculation on Capitol Hill has included the possibility the U.S. agencies operating in Benghazi were secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels.

Re: Attack on American Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi [MERGED]

Regardless of the veracity associated with what may have actually taken place, what would be the primary significance identified with the moving of Soviet-made MANPADS to the Syrian opposition?

1. We hide our direct connection.
2. We get the arms out of Libya.
3. We get the arms to Syria, which gets weapons from Russia, and thus there is familiarity with the weapon and needed parts and ammunition.
4. If the conflict subsides, the arms may well pivot vs. Russian interests.
5. See Iran Contra.
6. If we put no "no-fly" into effect, the only aircraft to engage are Syrian.
7 We know their operational characteristics but have not disclosed ours.